This UNESCO
programme encourages research on the interconnection of identity problems with
the development of democracy (1). The decline of the
two main systems of thought which have dominated contemporary history - liberal
universalism and Marxist universalism - in fact the end of the great empires,
has coincided with an increase in nationalism, religious fundamentalism and a
whole range of xenophobic and racist attitudes. These phenomena seem to us to be
exerting a decisive pressure on social development and have in the past given
rise to events with tragic consequences for humanity, ranging from wars between
nations in the nineteenth century to totalitarian regimes, Fascism, Nazism and
Stalinism. It is distressing to find this return to identity " values " taking
place within a context of acute economic crisis world-wide today as in the
1930s. " Identities " which set themselves up as standards and have no place for
otherness and difference belong to the logic of totalitarianism. The social
context, like the intellectual environment in which this explosion of "
identities " is taking place, gives us good reason to dread developments similar
to those that resulted in totalitarian systems and the Second World War.

This trend is even more worrying in that it is very widespread. For several
years the development of nationalist and xenophobic movements has run counter to
the trend towards economic globalization and the establishment of areas of
multinational economic solidarity. This movement is strengthened by the
emergence of new formulations of the claims of minorities designated as "
ethnico-national " or even " linguistico-cultural " (2). This process of
differentiation is bound up with the assertion of independence by the most
diverse social groups, within developed Nation-States, which is a particularly
wide-spread social phenomenon and clear sign of the increasing segmentation of
modern societies.

However, we should not forget the positive side of this situation. In many
ways the universalisms which are now in such confusion were fronts for very
specific ideological and geopolitical interests. The rediscovery of paths
towards autonomy which would show regard for the wishes of the greatest number
of people could quite rightly be considered very encouraging. After all, our era
is also " the age of rights " (3) and among
fundamental rights, it now seems legitimate to include the recognition of
diversity which safeguards the identity of each individual as well as the
existence of various " collective identities ".

Multicultural and multi-ethnic societies thus pose problems which raise
fundamental questions about the organization of our civilizations. What is at
stake is so important that comprehensive consideration of the causes of this
situation has become a matter of urgency. Given the scale of these phenomena, it
seems vital to re-examine the approaches adopted by the social sciences so as to
equip ourselves intellectually to combat retrograde tendencies which, although
they are taking new shapes, nonetheless constitute a threat to peace and
development. However, if we simply express our misgivings at the excessive
demands associated with " identity ", we might be missing the point. Our aim
should be to forge conceptual tools which can respond to these demands without
sacrificing the universalist imperative to protect and develop fundamental human
rights (4).

A combination of different approaches may make it possible to grasp the
complexity of these phenomena. We can describe their importance for the
comprehension of contemporary societies by proposing a theme for reflection,
both historical and philosophical, on the overall evolution of societies, and
then adopt a geopolitical approach, which has the advantage of casting a clearer
light on contemporary social movements.

Reflection on contemporary European history reveals the
existence of a historical trend which makes it easier to identify the key
problems at issue in multicultural and multi-ethnic societies. We would have to
clarify this (tentative) view of our history and see if the two extremes
observed in Europe are pitted against each other in other world regions, and if
so in what ways.

There is, on the one hand, an effort which is the force driving human
progress itself, to overcome identity constraints and to draw up rules which
guarantee the freedom of the individual and collective life in a State
governed by the law and maybe tomorrow in a law-abiding society.

Yet, on the other hand, there is a tendency to fall back on identities
which generates new types of ethnic, national or religious fundamentalism. The
emergence of preoccupations with identity can be backward-looking and reflects
a felt need to counterbalance ethnocidal tendencies caused by the
technological advances of recent decades (5).

The concept of progress and modernity
meant first of all controlling an increasingly large area of freedom. Modern
democracies were constructed on this basis by fighting for individual autonomy
against the types of order traditionally structuring society. This fundamental
progress of civilization was reflected in the acknowledgement of freedom of
opinion and of the press and in the right to form associations and political
parties and culminated in the definition of human rights. The social definition
of individuals - through social power (serfdom, gender domination), through
political power (suzerainty) and, in a more profound way, through religious
control - gradually gave way to the definition of individuals in the private
realm. Secularism can be seen in this long progression as the social hallmark of
the movement towards increasing autonomy for both men and women.

We subsequently can extend this reasoning on the liberation of human
archaisms to a limitless theory on the freedom of the individual with respect to
the " social ". At the dawn of the twentieth century, Europe witnessed the
destruction of its most firmly rooted identities. In this situation, individuals
learn to construct their own identity and to manage their own existence without
the help of the social order and its ready-made rules. In his meditation on
Viennese culture at the turn of the century, Jacques Le Rider pointed out " this
lack of definition can be extremely fertile, encouraging combinations of the
most extraordinary variety and richness " (6). For a long time,
this movement quite rightly has been regarded as the very essence of the
progress of civilization. But it is counterbalanced by a second phenomenon of
comparable magnitude.

This game of self-creation came to an
abrupt halt following the First World War. The pre-occupation with national
identity which was associated with the emergence of fascist ideologies led to a
use of the theme of identity which was to be pushed to extremes by Nazism. The
women's liberation movement and the integration of Jews into German society were
both brutally curtailed. The savage " restoration " of identity in the Nazi mind
formed the basis for racist behaviour and institutionalized violence. A
caricatural portrayal of " feminine nature " made possible the subjection of
women to unrestricted male domination. Identity was no longer an individual
attribute that could be displayed or concealed as the individual chose. For
Jews, it was determined by birth, inevitably, and then reduced to its simplest
expression, that of a stamp not only on certificates of birth, marriage and
death but also on the individual. The yellow star was an instrument of exclusion
and a passport to the death camps.

The resumption of efforts to remove identity driven constraints coincided
with the return of economic growth from the 1950s onwards. It was reflected in a
rich diversity of cultural and social creativity, including the contributions of
intellectual movements such as existentialism and various kinds of structuralism
and the social innovations of the 1960s and 1970s, from the progress made by
Women's Lib to independence movements (7). Since the end of
the 1970s, these civilizing movements have been seriously challenged once again
by a regressive social trend which is now reflected in an archaic conception of
social relations that, recently, the philosopher Michel Serres described as "
the most inegalitarian, savage and murderous [...] that history has ever known "
(8).

Over the last 15 years we have observed a forceful return to identity "
values " which are perceived as a remedy for the despair brought about by the
present state of social relations. This tendency can be no more than the
harmless re-emergence of an ineradicable nostalgia for a mythical golden age,
but it can also, more dangerously take the form of a new domineering
fundamentalism. We would do well to bear in mind that this return to identity "
values " is now, as in the 1930s, set in a context of a serious economic crisis.

While realizing that history does not automatically repeat itself, we are
aware that barbarity thrives on uncontrolled swings between individual freedom
and the re-establishment of " identity ". But is this enough to pave the way for
solutions enabling freedom to be enjoyed without paying the dreadful price of
collective movements intolerant of the freedom that the individual seeks? The
challenge today is to find ways of reconciling these two major tendencies. What
this means, in fact, is that patterns for human societies need to be invented
for which no previous model exists. The analyses we undertake should eventually
make it possible to achieve this intellectual goal, without which any political
mechanisms which may be improvised to deal with the situation would more than
likely prove inoperable.

The end of the Cold War has greatly accelerated
the development of democracy and, consequently, a transformation in the nature
of conflict. Present-day conflicts are no longer conducted exclusively between
States, and ideological rivalries no longer dominate the international scene.
The democratization of societies has enabled an increasing number of local,
regional and national grievances to be aired which not long ago were still
controlled by States or empires.

The nature and causes of conflicts are evolving very quickly. Yves Lacoste
recently drew attention to two important facts directly related to our problem:
the large number of new States which have been formed in Europe since the
disappearance of the Iron Curtain in 1989; and the large number of conflicts
that " have but scant direct cause or economic justification ". The belligerents
are not fighting over previous resources but above all for national reasons, for
each Nation-State is the more concerned to liberate its entire " historic
territory " when its compatriots are being oppressed in regions annexed by other
Nation-States (9).
Ethnic, cultural and especially linguistic and religious factors are playing a
role in these conflicts which we are ill-prepared to evaluate.

Analysis of these situations and of their involvement in the production of
current national self-images constitutes an intellectual effort that must be
made if a method of contemporary social organization geared toward the
prevention and resolution of conflicts of this new type is to be defined.

Lucidity and courage are required to acknowledge
that - with few exceptions - the attempt to put forward a model for the
organization of developed societies which takes " identity " dimensions,
especially ethnico-national ones, into account has so far been a failure. The
social sciences too often evaluate these problems on the basis of analytical
models in which nineteenth century nationalism occupies too large a place and
they persistently minimize their overall importance at world level. The need to
develop new analyses constitutes a major responsibility for the social sciences.

Research can be divided into two broad groups:

The first approach is to study the way in which ethnico-national
situations are related to society at large: a general theory should be worked
out in this direction. The need to work out a code of ethics for research in
this area, on which we shall dwell later (Methods and organization of
research in MOST - below), is particularly important in that the present
lack of data is due largely to the ethnocentrism of most approaches and even
until recently.

The second area open to the social sciences combines the various
operations which enable each ethnico-national community to know its own
language, history and cultural works and to be aware of the economic and
sociological facts which determine its future. We can designate this cluster
of scientific approaches which call upon a large number of disciplines by the
term " self-knowledge ".

The general state of knowledge
concerning national questions and ethnico-national groupings did not prepare
sociologists, analysts and theoreticians in political science to investigate the
role that these social groups play in society as a whole. The study of national
phenomena has not been sufficiently dissociated from the political interests of
States and nations. Reasonably large-scale surveys of ethnico-national
minorities have too often been financed by States at a time when their
grievances were being put forward with a violence that was creating serious
problems for a particular society.

With respect to the theory, the aim is to formulate an overall concept of
social evolution accounting for the importance of the diversity of feelings of
national, ethnic, religious or cultural identity. This has been neglected in the
past. Indeed, " liberal " thinking has more often than not based its analyses on
the hypothesis of the eventual destruction of feelings of ethnico-national
identity. Although using different arguments, the traditions of classical
Marxism have been equally unsuccessful in accounting for this dimension of the
life of a society.

If we are to have any chance of progressing in this respect, we must first
re-examine the theories which have been formulated in this area and also the
historical attempts to make these phenomena part of a more or less stable social
structure. It is surprising that although essential texts are now available,
there is no consolidated study that gives any kind of shape to the statements
made on this subject. The time has now come to undertake a consolidated study
integrating these dimensions in an analysis of the functioning of complex
societies.

The most objective possible knowledge of
ethnico-national situations is needed in order to counteract nationalism
tendencies - or more generally passion - which can lead to conflict. Historians
observe that public support for wars is secured through recourse to national
myths, often very deeply rooted in the collective memory and which are
reactivated when most convenient. Scientific knowledge is the best defence
against this type of manipulation.

The importance of the self-knowledge process in this area for society is,
however, by no means accepted by society at large or by the members of
ethnico-national communities themselves, who are frequently in a minority
situation. In order to understand this phenomenon one must be aware of the
fundamental obstacles that confront those wishing to acquire this critical
knowledge. The very identity of nations and communities is built around
different mythologies.

It was only very recently that the desire for peace in certain peoples led to
a re-examination of national mythologies. For example, France and Germany are
only now starting to re-examine their national history years after the second
World War. This process is even more difficult for minorities in that their
situation is fraught with insecurity. Their knowledge of their past has for a
long time been a response to an urgent need to build a minority mythology
designed to reinforce their awareness of their existence. These mythologies -
whose positive aspects are an essential role in the construction of an identity
which should not be underrated - are today as dangerous as were the great
national mythologies of the recent past, since they very often result in ethnic
fundamentalism or inward-looking micro-nationalism.

Obviously, it is inconceivable that the UNESCO research programme re-write
national histories or the history of particular minorities. It would be
possible, however, to draw up a list, within the framework of regional surveys,
of situations where this would be particularly useful. Support from the
international community might encourage such endeavours, the initiative for
which, of course, should come from those concerned.

Study of the development of democracy, the role of the State, the
emergence of new nationalisms and new xenophobic and racist types of behaviour,
and of the role of " ethnico-national " or " linguistico-cultural " minorities
is the core problem. We must nonetheless be aware that the complexity of
multicultural and multi-ethnic societies means that those who study them are
tempted to incorporate all manner of different subjects, with the risk that the
result could be seen as a caricature of the complexities involved. It will be
absolutely essential to keep our main aim in mind when we select the themes for
the programme.

This raises a question whose importance should not be underestimated. The
underdevelopment of this area of study and the vagueness of the concept of "
multicultural " are too often taken as implicit licence to blur the definition
of the main purpose of the research. One is then tempted to make one's
analytical approach mirror the segmentation of society. The differentiation of
groups according to gender, age, language, religion and culture is a factor
which must be taken into account in the study of " ethnico-national " groupings.
However important these aspects may be, we must not single out any individual
one in a multicultural approach to the societies we are studying.

Feminist demands, for instance, will assume their full significance to the
extent that we do not make them the subject of a separate study but instead
analyse their connection with the demands of a particular ethnico-national
group. It is important, for instance, to consider the viewpoint of indigenous
women from Quebec when they denounce the " fallacy that collective rights are
the only important ones and that individual rights - which are often fundamental
human rights - are no more than an infectious illness transmitted by Whites of
European origin... " (10) to regard these
women as a minority themselves would prevent us from understanding either the
problems of indigenous peoples or those of women. Many examples of this kind
could be quoted, as regards both differentiation linked to gender and that due
to the impact of religions. The very importance of the role played by these
factors in the evolution of the problems of multicultural societies frequently
leads to confusion and aberrations which must be firmly resisted.

These precautions taken, research geared to the programme's central themes
could be divided into three main categories:

The study of fundamental concepts on the one hand so as to understand how
the problems of multicultural and multi-ethnic societies have been approached
by different schools and in various world regions and, on the other so as to
ensure a sharply defined terminology.

The analysis of contemporary societies in which the factors leading to the
crystallization of identity " values " can be identified.

The prospects for the organization of multi-ethnic and multicultural
societies. This means less, at this stage, the proposal of solutions that have
been specifically studied in each region and more the formulation of overall
approaches and procedures for the prevention of conflicts that could be
applied to concrete situations.

The study of multi-ethnic and multicultural
societies raises questions of paramount importance for contemporary societies.
If we are to respond to the intellectual challenge facing us now, we should not
confine our analysis to the examination of problems that are too specific. We
must, with the utmost clarity, formulate the general theoretical and
methodological questions which could guide efficient work.

An effort should be made to define the concepts and the terminology in order
to determine what practical human situations are involved in the multicultural
and multi-ethnic dimension of a large number of present-day societies.

Very varied terms have been used to designate situations of this kind.
Although the list is in no way exhaustive, some of the terms used, for example,
are: linguistic minorities, linguistico-cultural minorities, ethnic minorities,
ethnico-cultural minorities, national minorities, national communities,
stateless nations, ethnic groups, ethnico-national communities, regional
movements, proponents of autonomy, supporters of independence, etc. We are often
referring to the same situations when we speak of individuals and communities
that use national languages, dialects, minority languages, less prominent
languages, regional languages, " less widely known " languages, local languages,
local dialects, and so forth.

It can also be seen, for instance that situations where there is contact
between groups have most frequently ended in the coexistence, within the same
political structure, particularly the conventional State, of groups, with or
without territory of their own, distinguished by linguistic, religious,
socio-economic and political divisions that are mutually reinforcing, in full or
in part. Theories of dependence, interior colonialism and the centre-periphery
model suggest, at first sight, interpretations which integrate the different
areas of social behaviour, and these theories were in fact put forward at
different times and in different contexts by social scientists from a variety of
disciplines.

It seems vital to us to take stock of things so as to make it possible to
study both the way these models were produced, the scientific as well as
ideological and political uses to which they are put and, of course, their
current validity for the subject we are studying.

Clarification of this sort, with respect to all concepts and terminology, is
quite essential. It is wise to avoid adding to the present confusion by putting
forward new definitions for which there is no clearly demonstrable need. The
scientific examination of the concepts and terminology should be conducted on
two levels: the social use of the term and the scientific use.

1) To achieve this goal, it is proposed that a list of terms be carefully
drawn up, avoiding any " a priori " list by studying the context in which a
given notion is used to designate the plurality of societies and their
components. This study should focus primarily on an examination of the use which
is made of a particular terminology by different schools of thought or according
to national and regional situations. In this way a very rich picture could
emerge of the different realities underlying the use and representation of the
terms by the different majority or minority societies.

2) This work of identification and analysis will, at the end of the initial
phase of the programme, provide a terminology for which we shall seek to achieve
the broadest possible consensus. Of course, this work of clarification, which
will strive to free research from ideological or political presuppositions in
which it is too often imprisoned, must not sacrifice the original contributions
of the different approaches. It will, more modestly, enable casting light on
their explicit or implicit references and thus facilitate intercomprehension in
an area where terminological misunderstandings are particularly fraught with
consequences.

There is, of course, no question here of
proposing a restrictive list of topics for consideration. These themes will be
defined more relevantly in connection with the setting up of regional surveys (below).
The few points which follow are the provisional conclusions drawn from the
discussions held so far.

1) We must examine the factors that explain this "resurgence of identities "
or the production of new identities. At first sight, this is something that does
not square with a situation of economic exchanges which, for the first time in
history, are truly on a world scale. This economic fact is being accompanied by
more and more demands for independence or autonomy. It is insufficient to simply
state that this movement may be one way of opposing the effects of
globalization. The resurgence of identities cannot be seen as just a movement to
salvage traditional and reassuring cultural forms. These issues must be delved
into more deeply from the point of view of social psychology or even the study
of communication systems. It is usually thought that the development of the
media is leading to the standardization of our world and to making individuals
part of a "global village". In reality, what we are seeing is much more complex
and contradictory, since although the mass media are indeed tending to impose an
undeniable standardization all over the world, the trend towards the
diversification of forms of cultural expression is, at the same time, also
growing stronger by the day.

2) Another way of tackling the problems of multi-ethnic societies is to
examine the role of State institutions in oppressing, sustaining or awakening
national or ethnico-national identities. Although it is fashionable nowadays to
talk about the eclipse of the nation State, it is nevertheless surprising since
the number of States is increasing considerably in several regions. In fact,
what we are seeing is more a transformation of the internal relations between
State institutions and the minorities on their territory. The growing number of
claims for regional autonomy and the larger number of ghettos inside the large
metropolises are raising this question with increasing urgency. We are, instead,
facing an unprecedented crisis in the imperialistic forms of the State which, in
the shape of empires or pseudo-federations, kept the aspirations of national or
ethnico-national groups out of the public eye. The accession to independence of
a growing number of small nations shows that we are here confronted by something
which is raising the problems of security and world peace in new terms.

3) The study of the institutional functions of States raises the need to
examine the way they are represented. The way in which minorities or identities
are perceived by themselves as well as by the international public plays an
important role in their history. The mere gathering of data about images of
oneself or images conveyed by the majority society raises very great
difficulties, even though accurate research methods have been developed,
particularly in social psychology and in socio-linguistics, and the findings of
surveys carried out with scrupulous accuracy may assume vital importance for the
future of the groups in question.

A study of the way in which the State and the law go together is also
essential, as every legal system is rooted in a mythology. At least two extremes
are discernible. The English-speaking model and that of many non-Western
European societies are clearly distinct but they are based on images of
societies made up of communities and groups whose cohesion is founded on
interdependence. These models admit theories of judicial pluralism which reject
the State as the sole framer of law and place value on the initiatives of those
administering the law, the producers of local laws. Conversely, the French model
is organized around a representation of society that juxtaposes a State that is
the sole possessor of the law, and a mass of individuals assumed to be free and
responsible. The law is a decisive factor making for the coherence of this kind
of organization since the State agrees to submit to it (theory of the State of
law). Individuals obtain guarantees from it (systems of declarations of rights)
which make their community organization and the recognition of the legal
existence of minorities, especially in the form of collective rights, pointless
or even harmful. This explains the hostility of the French doctrine to judicial
pluralism and its attachment to the explanatory principle of the vertical
hierarchy of norms and the State´s standard-setting functions. As they stand,
these models seem hardly viable. The growing complexity and heterogeneity of
modern societies call both for the lines of new kind of solidarity to be laid
down and for the over-rigid lines of unitarian patterns to be made more pliable.
This programme is therefore calling on lawyers of different traditions to engage
in an intercultural dialogue so that they can together reinterpret their
mythologies, as they inevitably must.

3.2.4 Present-day multi-ethnic and multicultural societies are made up of
several types of ethnico-national minorities or groups. Beside the indigenous
minorities with lands, we must not forget minorities without lands, whose
presence in this or that State either go back a long way or may be more recent
e.g. from Gypsies to immigrants and refugees. In particular, the new immigrant
minorities and refugees are constituting a more and more widespread problem as a
result of the population movements being caused in several parts of the world by
economic imbalance, political upheavals and wars. The ways in which these
communities group together and their social situation within the various host
countries are raising very serious problems and are endangering the cohesion of
a considerable number of societies. The study of economic and social conditions
and that of racial and ethnic representations are clearly matters of urgency
here.

On the
basis of the studies thus produced, the aim is to put overall prospects to
decision-makers that will be able to guarantee that the movement towards
individual freedom, which was the key contribution of the Enlightenment can be
admitted into society and into politics without sacrificing for all that, in a
standardizing conception of nation-States, the collective wish expressed by the
emergence of ethnic, religious and, more broadly, cultural factors of
differentiation. Drawing up proposals of this kind means that thought has to be
given to three sets of problems.

1) The first set concerns the overall conception of society and the
theoretical questions resulting from it. The main question here is doubtless
that of the theoretical and practical implications of the idea of the
development of societies that are based on the notions of cultural or
multicultural pluralism. The theme of the institution of a multicultural
society is increasingly present in the social science discourse and in that
of ordinary journalism, but the term is very imprecise and often used to
disguise a lack of determination to deal with the problems for which it is used.
Multiculturalism has overtones of vague magnanimity and of an ill-defined wish
to be receptive but it is basically ambiguous. On the one hand, it confronts
with a critical perspective the coexistence of different cultures and, on the
other, it functions as a programme of integration for a society in crisis. It is
a concept that could very well launch a new kind of hegemony which would absorb
different ways of life and views of the world and ensure its power by
manipulating the contradiction, tension and conflicts which arise from the
forces at work in society.

Other fundamental problems should be included in this first set, such as the
questions linked to the debate on cultural relativism and
assimilation/integration, the strategies of information/disinformation about
minorities, the processes by which cultures come to be considered as exotic, and
the conditions for creativity in minority cultures. Special attention could be
devoted here to the study of linguistic diversity, which either makes for
economic development or is a hindrance to trade. The vigour of people and
communities is directly dependent on their feeling of identity. A person
submerged in a uniform mass, a mere number in a group whose identity is not
immediately perceptible, would lose the inclination to distinguish
himself/herself and would lack the strength to achieve distinction. Cultural
diversity could well be a powerful driving force for the development of both
individuals and societies.

2) A particularly important application of these ideas is to be found in the
discussions currently on at the international level about the ways in which the
law can lay down rules for managing the situation of ethnico-national
minorities. A fundamental debate can thus begin between the theory which has it
that "minority rights are a pitfall for Human Rights, and especially for
cultural rights, because they diminish the notion of cultural identity" (11) and the gradual
definition of fundamental rights for minorities and indigenous peoples by
international or regional authorities. Particular attention should be devoted to
the rights of indigenous peoples who, at present, are still insufficiently
covered by scientific thinking about minorities, in part, incidentally, because
of the indigenous people themselves who reject the term minorities. The process
by which indigenous peoples --particularly in North America-- are managing to be
gradually recognized as peoples and enjoy the right of self-determination and
independence of government (as distinct from the right of secession) may,
however, indirectly influence the thinking on minorities and constitute one of
the ways of organizing multicultural societies. In addition, the concept of
indigenity is beginning to appear in the European context and even if France,
for instance, is refusing to recognize the legal existence of indigenous people
on its territory, the concept has major political consequences (12). Examining
different national legal traditions in the light of the problems of cultural
diversity is a particularly useful way of avoiding the stumbling block of giving
an abstract definition of rights which would have only limited chances of being
translated into reality. There is still considerable work to be done to come up
with really effective ways of making it possible to exercise these rights in a
manner adapted to different regional and local situations.

3) Lastly, the study of possible forms of political organization for such
multi-ethnic or multicultural societies is of primary importance. If it is not
at all apparent that the concept of the State is presently losing or must lose
its importance, conversely, it is certain that the State has to transform itself
if it is to cope successfully with the current explosion of identities. It is
becoming increasingly clear that the State has to change in the direction of its
technocratic elites becoming more familiar with local ethnic cultures, as hoped
for by Anthony D. Smith (13). It is less a
question of adapting people to the State and more one of asking what structure
is suitable for them.

From this standpoint, an examination is vital of the political solutions
proposed for the management of ethnic cultural differences on the basis of
territory and forms of personal autonomy. This could be done using the views and
proposals of authors as different as Otto Bauer, Karl Kautsky, Karl Renner and
Arend Lijphart (14).

Of course, examination of these theories should not be confined to a
historical study but should be directed towards the adaptation of particular
ideas to present-day contexts that raise in new terms, for example, the
relationship between the need for autonomy of small-sized national groups and
the reality of supra-State structures organizing economic exchanges and handling
security problems.

The topicality of this theme was recently highlighted in a very interesting
discussion --organized by the Centre for Human Values of Princeton University--
on the philosophical principles underlying the different patterns of the liberal
organization of societies (15). This discussion
shows that agreement can quite easily be reached on the fact that the need to
provide social conditions for the survival of the identity of groups placed in a
minority situation is not incompatible with the principles for the safeguarding
of fundamental individual rights. Not only that, but this need is suggested by
the liberal principle of equal respect for all which, so as not to discriminate
against an individual from a minority group, calls for the recognition of the
collective identities of minorities. Accordingly, liberal democracy is
identified as much with the safeguarding of universal rights as with public
recognition of particular cultures. The excellence of the philosophical and
historical examination of the issue carried out during this discussion makes the
weakness of the political prospects outlined at the same time all the more
conspicuous, despite the value of the proposals put forward by Charles Taylor (16) . This difficulty
clearly underlines the urgent need to embark on an investigation in this field
(17).

It would seem that a research
programme as ambitious as this could be carried out effectively by organizing a
specific synergy between teams responsible for undertaking a detailed study of
problems in a number of regional cases of particular significance and one or
more teams responsible for dealing, in a transverse and composite form, with the
key questions raised by the programme.

It seems particularly necessary, owing to the kind of problems under study,
to work out precise ethical principles through either regional surveys or the
formulation of concepts and theories. Where small nations or " ethnico-national
" minorities are particularly concerned, it is crucial to provide, at each stage
of the research, for the participation of representatives from the groups under
study (18). The need
to organize information in accordance with a comparative approach cannot serve
as a pretext for the imposition of methods and surveys which do not take account
of the achievements of those concerned in their respective fields.

The problems covered by this programme are of a comprehensive
and universal nature. This remark is nevertheless not enough to guarantee the
efficacy of the research undertaken. We are faced with a very difficult problem
that must be tackled by an action-oriented approach, taking into account two
considerations that are especially important:

1) The intellectual aim that we have outlined obliges us to favour an
approach that is as general as possible, with comparisons of the most varied and
geographically remote societies. The research must be international and
comparative in the broadest possible way and must envisage a number of
fundamental problems in their widest philosophical and theoretical dimensions.

2) However, the nature of what we have to study prompts us to take regional
and national particularities into account. The most relevant dimension in this
respect seems to be at the regional level, with a combination of spatial
economic, social and political indicators. We could therefore imagine teams
producing studies in countries in the North America-Europe region or in more
restricted regional areas such as Central and Eastern Europe or the
Mediterranean area, and so forth. Of course, this two-tier approach is equally
valid for the other regions such as Africa, Asia, South America, etc.

1) In the relatively brief initial phase, a list of the principal questions
(a multidisciplinary collective evaluation) could be drawn up by a small group
of five or six experts in consultation with their colleagues from the regional
teams. This would make it possible to assess the situation in a relatively short
space of time.

2) During the implementation phase proper, a team could be asked to examine
the fundamental concepts, still in close collaboration with the regional teams,
in accordance with the problems identified in Analytical study of
contemporary societies above.

3) Still in the programme implementation phase proper, one or more other
teams could concentrate on the preparation of the study at the most general
level of a given aspect of the problem (overall conception of society, political
models, questions of international law, etc.).

The contribution of the social sciences in such a sensitive
area should help in devising solutions for the promotion of democracy and the
prevention of conflicts brought about by the confrontations inherent in the
strengthening of the multicultural and multi-ethnic character of most
contemporary societies. This must not be assumed to be already the case nor must
it remain just wishful thinking. We must give thought, even as the research is
being prepared, to the conditions necessary for achieving this goal.

In the implementation phase of this programme, it seems necessary to think
how use can be made of the mass media in democratic societies. We find, for
instance, that in countries like Canada or Australia, very small human groups
(Indians, Aboriginals or Inuits) are claiming rights over vast areas of land and
are beginning to obtain them, with the support of public opinion and several
international organizations.

Conflicts between Nation-States or concerning ethnico-national minorities
bring into play powerful processes of disinformation as can be seen in the role
of national mythologies and the distorted images of hostile groups that play a
key role in their development. The responsibility of the researchers is to help
equip democratic societies with the means to counter these disinformation
activities. This being so, UNESCO could undertake to produce and circulate
democratically verified information about the different components of
multicultural and multi-ethnic societies, " ethnico-national " or "
linguistico-cultural " nations or minorities.

There is a considerable dearth of information in this area, not only inside
States but also internationally. In fact, only a few NGOs, with too often
limited resources, see in part to this essential function. It would be
advisable, in order to overcome this shortage, to encourage the setting up, at
the regional level, of bodies to gather, process and circulate information about
the components of the multicultural and multi-ethnic fabric of a region, i.e.
small nations or minorities. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
thus recently expressed the wish that a " mediation instrument " should be set
up, one of whose functions would involve " constant monitoring of changes in the
situation of minorities in all the European States " (19). The CSCE, for its
part, has entrusted the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights in
Warsaw and the High Commissioner of the CSCE for National Minorities with the
task of taking into account all relevant data on the subject. In May 1993, the
Warsaw Bureau thus held a seminar on " positive experiences " in regard to the
protection of national minorities, and the High Commissioner has just proposed
devoting a further seminar to the Roma´s. Similarly, the International
Colloquium on Linguistic Rights/Human Rights, which was held from 15 to 17
November 1990 at the Council of Europe, envisaged the establishment of a
Monitoring Mechanism for the Linguistic Rights of Minorities(20). Bodies of this
kind ought to allocate to themselves a fairly wide geopolitical area, but with
undeniable common features. Europe in its broadest dimension, reaching from the
Atlantic to the Urals and from the Mediterranean to the far North, seems to
stand out as an area where effective action could be taken.

We can imagine that the programme initiated by UNESCO may move towards the
establishment of regional bodies of this sort. In complete harmony with its
fundamental mission, UNESCO could thus contribute to the prevention of many
conflicts. Equipping oneself with the means to combat disinformation is
certainly an important contribution to the construction of a culture of peace,
ensuring the development of humanity with due regard for its diversity.

1 This contribution owes much to the discussions
at the international meeting on MOST programme which was held in Ottawa from 11
to 14 December 1993 by the Canadian National Commission for UNESCO and the
Division for the International Development of Social and Human Sciences of
UNESCO, and thus particularly to the comments and suggestions made by Ms Nadia
Auriat, Ms Elisabeth Barot and Mr Ali Kazancigil. I am also grateful for the
advice and comments of the members of the Scientific Council of the Mercator
Programme for Research on Ethnolinguistic Minorities (Commission of the
European Communities-Maison des Sciences de l´Homme), Emmanuel Decaux, Hervé
Guillorel and Norbert Rouland and Ms Richèle Rivet and my colleagues and
collaborators André Bourgeot, Claudio Cratchley, Robert Lafont, Elise
Marienstras, Paul Siblot, Raymond Verdier and Live Yu Sion.

11 See Meyer-Bisch, 1992 and 1993. Also see the primary contributions by
Rouland, 1991.

12 Cf. the evolution of the CSCE norms and the referendum on the independence
for New Caledonia, planned for 1998

13 Smith, 1981. Also see the excellent study by Henri Lefebvre which is still
very topical (Lefebvre, 1937)

14 Material for a study of Marxist theories has been partially assembled by
Haupt, 1974 and Yaari, 1978-1979. See also Weill, 1987 as well as the excellent
edition of Otto Bauer procured by Claudie Weill (Bauer,1987). More and more
authors of a " liberal " persuasion are studying this field, especially in the
United States and in Northern European countries, for example see Rothschild´s
classical work, 1981.

15 The discussion, by Amy Gutman, Susan Wolf, Steven C.Rockefeller and
Michael Walzer of a fundamental study by Charles Taylor, is reproduced in
Taylor, 1992.

16 Cf. in particular Taylor, 1979 and 1988.

17 William Safran recently prepared a very thorough review of the
institutional solutions applied in different regions of the world to achieve the
" national integration " of ethnic minorities (Safran, 1994).

18 The code of ethics on research drawn up by the Royal Commission of Inquiry
on the Indigenous Populations of Canada is of very great interest in this
connection as it aims to ensure that due respect is accorded to the cultures,
languages, knowledge and values of indigenous peoples as well as to the norms
that they use to establish the legitimacy of learning.

19 Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Recommendation 1177 on
the rights of minorities, adopted on 5 February 1992.

Henri Giordan, Research Director at
the National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), Centre for Law and Culture
(University of Paris X), is responsible for the department Minorities - General
Studies, at the European data bank Mercator (European Commission -
Maison de Sciences de l'Homme, Paris). As an author of numerous studies
on linguistic minorities in France and in Europe, he recently edited an
important volume on minorities in Europe (Les minorités en Europe: droits
linguistiques et Droits de l'Homme.Paris. Kimé (diffusion PUF).
1992.).